Re: How to fix false positives on references to discarded text/data?

[Keith Owens]

On Mon, 24 Dec 2001 11:05:00 +0100 (CET), 
Kai Germaschewski <[e-mail]> wrote:
>According to my reading of the docs and also to my testing, .subsection 0 
>and .previous should be equivalent here. But .subsection 0 may be cleaner.

As I read the gas info text, .subsection changes the current entry on
top of stack, it does not stack a new section/subsection pair.
.previous swaps the top of stack with the previous top of stack.  I
suspect that you would get different results if there was more than one
section on the stack.  In any case, .subsection 0 is "obviously correct".